Posted on 06/10/2004 8:55:07 AM PDT by Cableguy
More than 3 years old, but still valid. Clinton should go down next time, given his failures on Al Qaeda and North Korea. Reagan will probably move up.
------------------ The Wall Street Journal Survey on Presidents
RANK NAME MEAN GREAT 1 George Washington 4.92 2 Abraham Lincoln 4.87 3 Franklin Roosevelt 4.67 NEAR GREAT 4 Thomas Jefferson 4.25 5 Theodore Roosevelt 4.22 6 Andrew Jackson 3.99 7 Harry Truman 3.95 8 Ronald Reagan 3.81 9 Dwight Eisenhower 3.71 10 James Polk 3.70 11 Woodrow Wilson 3.68 ABOVE AVERAGE 12 Grover Cleveland 3.36 13 John Adams 3.36 14 William McKinley 3.33 15 James Madison 3.29 16 James Monroe 3.27 17 Lyndon Johnson 3.21 18 John Kennedy 3.17 AVERAGE 19 William Taft 3.00 20 John Quincy Adams 2.93 21 George Bush 2.92 22 Rutherford Hayes 2.79 23 Martin Van Buren 2.77 24 William Clinton 2.77 25 Calvin Coolidge 2.71 26 Chester Arthur 2.71 BELOW AVERAGE 27 Benjamin Harrison 2.62 28 Gerald Ford 2.59 29 Herbert Hoover 2.53 30 Jimmy Carter 2.47 31 Zachary Taylor 2.40 32 Ulysses Grant 2.28 33 Richard Nixon 2.22 34 John Tyler 2.03 35 Millard Fillmore 1.91 FAILURE 36 Andrew Johnson 1.65 37 Franklin Pierce 1.58 38 Warren Harding 1.58 39 James Buchanan 1.33
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
To begin with, he stole the goddam election ... as even admitted nowadays by hardened Democrats. His career in Congress was a joke. His brother is a murderer, his cousin a rapist, his nephews an abomination to all of New England.
Carter? A micromanaging mean-spirited SOB, who damn near sank the whole ship. Clinton? Just who in the hell came up with this hossheep? Peter Jennings?
"The key word is "objective." We both feel that Clinton was an absolute disgrace to the office, and an utter failure. But if we want to look at Clinton's ultimate impact on the affairs and future of the nation (which is what these historians claim to be doing), we couldn't possibly do that yet, because there hasn't been enough time for his actions to fully shake out. "
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
I understand what the "historians" want....
I take some moderate exception to your assumption that I "feel" Clinton was a disgrace, and failure. He was. Period. No "feelings" involved in my thinking on those points. ( VBG )
My mind is made up....and I could round up a boat-load of highly objective facts to bolster my argument. Why wait for other "bad" things to happen, or come to light?
Bottom line is....I don't need no stinking historians to tell me what I think and know.
FRegards,
"Whether or not you like what he did (and for the most part I do not), he was unquestionably one of the most effective and influential presidents in American history. "
}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
Wait just a second here.........Pol Pot was a pretty effective and "influential" leader too....Okay, just kidding. : )
Here's how I see FDR.....he helped create too many government ( socialistic..?? ) programs...but he did help give people hope, and a sense of accomplishment...during very harsh times. I kind of think that FDR would be very, very disappointed as to the breathe and scope of government give-a-ways now.
FWIW-
Clinton is clearly rated too high. He is an impeached president who had to spend time dealing with that impeachment when he should have been preventing our enemies' from planning 911. His presidency can only be rated a failure. Same goes for Jimmy Carter.
I looked up the term "bloviator" the other day, and it apparently descended from "bloviation" which was a noun
coined to describe the then Senator's speeches (rather pompous and long winded).
Wow! Famous for yet another thing. This is great!
As usual, you take a sentence out of context and think that "is" Lincoln. Lincoln's greatness was that he had already forced the issue of emancipation by the time he uttered those words. It's almost like "plausible deniability." He knew what he had done.
They put Wilson in near great? Under Wilson the Federal Income Tax was enshrined into the constitution.
Have your own opinion. But you're virtually alone. Lincoln was phenomenally great, and Reagan, as good as he was, will never top him. Washington remains #1, but you and the other neo-Confederates can have your cockeyed view of the world.
Stalin who butchered 20-40 million of his own countryman was an ally?? The fact is Russian troops didnt even control Russia, there wouldnt have been a war. Russias military was completely destroyed as were all of its manufacturing centers we could have marched to Moscow with no resistance whatsoever. We definitely didnt have to give Stalin half of Europe. We can thank FDR for giving half of Europe to communists. Fifty years of cold war, thanks to FDR!!!!
Stalin who butchered 20-40 million of his own countryman was an ally?? The fact is Russian troops didnt even control Russia, there wouldnt have been a war. Russias military was completely destroyed as were all of its manufacturing centers we could have marched to Moscow with no resistance whatsoever. We definitely didnt have to give Stalin half of Europe. We can thank FDR for giving half of Europe to communists. Fifty years of cold war, thanks to FDR!!!!
I took no sentence out of context. Deny he said it? Deny he meant it?
Denial yourself?
As a result of WWII, the U.S. came out the only real winner of that war -- the only superpower and the wealthiest nation by far, with everyone in debt to us. How is that "giving all our money away"? We supplied our allies with weapons, which served to help us.
While the Lewis and Clarke expedition may have taken place sooner or later, you never know about how timing might have delayed this or that event, perhaps delaying by 20-30 years what we will both agree is the inevitable. History does seem to lurch forward regardless, but there are decisions that propell it rather as opposed to history dragging its participants along if you will. His simple commission of the expedition paid huge dividends and helped significantly to propell the nation West.
The abolition of the slave trade also set him apart, but I do confess that I do not know the subtleties of the politics surrounding that act.
Your information about Madison is good stuff, and perhaps he does not get the credit he deserves. Thanks for such interesting posts.
Now you're just messing with me. Was the Cold War with the USSR, and the Aligned Third World nations just a hallucination?
We'll have to agree to disagree. You'll never convince me that FDR was anything other than a shill for his communist buddies, if not his masters.
As I say, lift what you will out of the context of the time. Less than one month after he said, that, L. issued the EP. That says it all.
BTW, please don't continue on that nonsensical "out of context" bs. I posted the whole quote.
He crapped all over the constitution and tried to have the CJOTSC arrested. He fixed the elections in Maryland by force of arms. He was no great President, unless of course, you think it's great to slaughter a whole generation of Americans to keep some states from doing what they were certainly allowed to do, morally and legally.
And just for the record, I'm from Chicago, i'm not a southerner. But I don't wear blinders and buy all the BS they sell in government schools. Is that where you teach?
And, sigh, yes, you do continue to take L. out of context. Jaffa is right.
They should be sued for malpractice and false advertising.
Just curious, why would you direct me to some obscure study on some obscure topic about which I have never expressed any interest nor opined upon?
And let me ask you one final question; do all the "professors" at that institution sigh when they make false accusations?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.